PNEUMATIC TOOLS ENTERPRISE,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-44(4), KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that disallowing the entire purchases was not justified. It restricted the addition to 15% of the gross profit on the unverifiable purchases, following its own prior decision.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal concerns the disallowance of expenditure on purchase of goods, which the Assessing Officer treated as bogus transactions. A similar disallowance was made in a prior assessment year.
What were the issues?
Whether the entire expenditure on purchases can be disallowed when treated as bogus, and if not, what is the appropriate method for estimation of profit.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “SMC” KOLKATA
Pneumatic Tools Income Tax Officer, बनाम / Enterprise, 83/1 Ward-44(4), 3, Govt. V/s. MadanMohan Burman Place (West), Kolkata- Street, Kolkata-700007 001 [PAN No.AADFP 9608 C] .. अपीलाथ� /Appellant ��यथ� /Respondent Hearing through video Conferencing Shri Manisha Patwari, ACA अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/By Appellant Shri Jayanta Khanra, JCIT, SR-DR ��यथ� क� ओर से/By Respondent 28-01-2021 सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing 17-03-2021 घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 28.08.2019 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-13, Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’].
The sole issue involved in this appeal is regarding the disallowance on expenditure of purchase of goods. The same being treated as bogus transactions by the Assessing Officer.
At the outset, the Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that similar disallowance was made in the case of the assessee by the Assessing Officer in the assessment carried out for the assessment year 2011-12. The matter travelled to the Tribunal and the Tribunal in the identical circumstances vide order dated 13.07.20 passed in has held that the disallowance of entire purchases
More judgments on Section 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026